Connect with us

International

Sri Lankan Government Responds to Attack That Kills 290

Published

on

  • A series of eight bombings killed 290 people in Sri Lanka and injured hundreds more.
  • Three of the bombs went off in churches on Easter Sunday.
  • The attacks are believed to have been carried out by a local extremist group called National Thowheeth Jamath, and authorities were warned of the attacks ahead of time, but never alerted the Prime Minister.
  • The government is enforcing a curfew throughout the capital and has also blocked several social media sites to prevent the spread of false information.

What Happened?

A series of eight bombings killed 290 people in Sri Lanka and injured at least 500 others on Easter Sunday.

In the country’s capital, Colombo, four attacks were located at hotels and another was at a housing complex. The remaining three bombings were carried out at churches during Easter mass. The churches were located in Colombo, Batticaloa, and Negombo.

Since the bombings happened on Easter, officials believe it was specifically targeting the Christian community in the country. Christianity is a smaller religion in Sri Lanka. Only 1.5 million of the country’s 21 million people practice it.

While the attacks occurred in popular tourist areas, most of the victims were citizens of Sri Lanka. Right now, authorities say 39 foreigners were killed.

Police believe that all the explosions were carried out by suicide bombers. No group has claimed the attack. However, police say a local extremist group, National Thoweeth Jamath, is behind the attacks. Twenty-four people have been arrested in relation to Sunday’s events so far. Officers have also recovered 87 detonators at a bus station in Colombo.

According to Sri Lanka’s government news site, INTERPOL is being sent to the country to investigate. The country will be in a state of emergency through midnight local time on Monday.

Warnings of Attack Went Ignored

Government officials say that they were alerted of the attacks two weeks in advance. A spokesperson said they received several warnings that specifically cited potential church bombings by NJT, and even listed suspects names.

The warnings were passed through relevant areas of the police department and to security services, but the information never made its way to the Prime Minister or his cabinet. Authorities took no action against NJT, and it is unclear if they took separate precautions to look into or prevent the attack.

Rajitha Senaratne, a government spokesperson, said that they would be looking into the government’s failure to respond.

“We saw the warnings and we saw the details given.” he added during a press conference. “We are very very sorry, as a government we have to say, we have to apologize to the families and the institutions about this incident.”

Authorities said the warnings they received indicated a much smaller attack. NJT is a newer, smaller group known for having anti-Buddhism beliefs. Buddhism is the most popular religion in Sri Lanka, and the group has been linked to incidents of Buddhist statues being vandalized or destroyed. They do not have a reputation for carrying out attacks of this level.  Because of this, officials believe a larger international network must also be behind the attack.

Government Enacts a Curfew And Social Media Ban

In an effort to prevent further attacks, the government enacted a curfew in Colombo. The curfew lasts from 8:00 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. and was enforced on Sunday and Monday. It is unclear if they will continue to apply it in the following days.

The government has also shut down several social media sites following the attack. In a statement posted on the government news site, they said, “false news reports were spreading through social media.” They hope that by banning these platforms, they will stop the spread of misinformation.

The statement said that the sites would be back up after investigations close. They cited that Instagram and Facebook would be specifically blocked, but users in the country have also said they are unable to access messaging apps like WhatsApp and Viber.

Viber released a statement on Twitter sending condolences to the victims of the attacks and warning local residents to read reports with caution.

Some residents are feeling frustrated by the blocks because they want to communicate with friends and family and confirm that they are safe.

One Colombo resident told The Washington Post that her friends from other countries were unable to reach her.

“I have had friends in London trying to contact me through both (WhatsApp and FaceBook),” she said. “And I can’t see them or message anybody.”

International Leaders Respond

As the news was breaking of the tragedy, several world leaders spoke out. President Donald Trump tweeted that the United States is “ready to help!”

French President Emmanuel Macron, whose country recently received global assistance after the iconic Notre Dame cathedral caught fire, reached out to Sri Lanka. He told the country that “all of our solidarity” is with its people.

Pope Frances also gave a statement. “I wish to express my heartfelt closeness to the Christian community [of Sri Lanka],” he said. “Wounded as it was gathered in prayer, and to all the victims of such cruel violence.”

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (The Guardian)

International

Israel Relaxes Abortion Restrictions in Response to U.S. Supreme Court Ruling

Published

on

The reforms follow similar moves by France and Germany as leaders across the political spectrum denounce the court’s decision.


Health Minister Makes Announcement

Israel is easing access to abortion in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s repeal of Roe v. Wade, Nitzan Horowitz, the country’s health minister and head of the small left-wing Meretz party, announced Monday.

“The U.S. Supreme Court’s move to deny a woman the right to abortion is a dark move,” he said in the announcement, “oppressing women and returning the leader of the free and liberal world a hundred years backward.”

The new rules, approved by a majority in the parliamentary committee, grant women access to abortion pills through the universal health system. Women will be able to obtain the pills at local health centers rather than only hospitals and surgical clinics.

The new policy also removes the decades-old requirement for women to physically appear before a special committee that must grant approval to terminate a pregnancy.

While women will still need to get approval, the process will become digitized, the application form will be simplified, and the requirement to meet a social worker will become optional.

The committee will only conduct hearings in the rare case it initially denies the abortion procedure.

Israel’s 1977 abortion law stipulates four criteria for termination of pregnancy: If the woman is under 18 or over 40, if the fetus is in danger, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, or an “illicit union,” including extramarital affairs, and if the woman’s mental or physical health is at risk.

All of the changes will take effect over the next three months.

The World Reacts

Politicians across the political spectrum from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson have denounced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision since it was announced Friday.

On Saturday, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne expressed support for a bill proposed by parliament that would enshrine the right to an abortion in the country’s constitution.

“For all women, for human rights, we must set this gain in stone,” she wrote on Twitter. “Parliament must be able to unite overwhelmingly over this text.”

Germany scrapped a Nazi-era law prohibiting the promotion of abortion Friday, just hours before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In Israel, abortion is a far less controversial issue than it is for Americans. Around 98% of people who apply for an abortion get one, according to the country’s Central Bureau of Statistics.

Part of the reason for Israel’s relatively easy access to abortion is that many residents interpret Jewish law to condone, or at least not prohibit, the procedure.

In the United States, several Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International, and the Women’s Rabbinic Network have expressed opposition to the court ruling, and some Jews have protested it as a violation of their religious freedom.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (ABC News) (The Guardian)

Continue Reading

International

Flight Deporting Refugees From U.K. to Rwanda Canceled at Last Hour

Published

on

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said the U.K.’s asylum policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.


Saved By The Bell

The inaugural flight in the U.K. government’s plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda was canceled about an hour and a half before it was supposed to take off Tuesday evening.

A last-minute legal intervention by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) halted the flight. Tuesday’s flight originally included 37 people, but after a string of legal challenges that number dwindled to just seven.

In its ruling for one of the seven passengers, a 54-year-old Iraqi man, the court said he cannot be deported until three weeks after the delivery of the final domestic decision in his ongoing judicial review proceedings.

Another asylum seeker, a 26-year-old Albanian man, told The Guardian he was in a “very bad mental state” and did not want to go to Rwanda, a country he knows nothing about.

“I was exploited by traffickers in Albania for six months,” he said. “They trafficked me to France. I did not know which country I was being taken to.”

A final domestic effort to block the flight in the Court of Appeals failed on Monday. The High Court will make a ruling on the asylum policy next month.

Britains Divided by Controversial Policy

U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel spoke to lawmakers after the flight was canceled, defending the asylum policy and saying preparations for the next flight will begin immediately.

“We cannot keep on spending nearly £5 million a day on accommodation including that of hotels,” she said. “We cannot accept this intolerable pressure on public services and local communities.”

“It makes us less safe as a nation because those who come here illegally do not have the regularized checks or even the regularized status, and because evil people-smuggling gangs use the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains to fund other appalling crimes that undermine the security of our country,” she continued.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Filippo Grandi, told CBC the policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.

“We believe that this is all wrong,” he said. “This is all wrong. I mean, saving people from dangerous journeys is great, is absolutely great. But is that the right way to do it? Is that the right, is that the real motivation for this deal to happen? I don’t think so. I think it’s… I don’t know what it is.”

An Iranian asylum seeker in a British detention center who was told to prepare for deportation before being granted a late reprieve was asked by ABC whether he ever thought the U.K. would send him to Africa.

“I thought in the U.K. there were human rights,” he said. “But so far I haven’t seen any evidence.”

The Conservative government’s plan was announced in April, when it said it would resettle some asylum seekers 4,000 miles away in Rwanda, where they can seek permanent refugee status, apply to settle there on other grounds, or seek asylum in a safe third country.

The scheme was meant to deter migrants from illegally smuggling themselves into the country by boat or truck.

Migrants have long made the dangerous journey from Northern France across the English Channel, with over 28,000 entering the U.K. in boats last year, up from around 8,500 the year prior. Dozens of people have died making the trek, including 27 who drowned last November when a single boat capsized.

See what others are saying: (BBC) (The Guardian) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

Ryanair Draws Outrage, Accusations of Racism After Making South Africans Take Test in Afrikaans

Published

on

Afrikaans, which is only spoken as a first language by around 13% of South Africa, has not been the country’s national language since apartheid came to an end in 1994.


Airline Won’t Explain Discrimination

Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, has received widespread criticism and accusations of racism after it began requiring South African nationals to complete a test in Afrikaans to prove their passport isn’t fraudulent.

The airline told BBC the new policy was implemented because of “substantially increased cases of fraudulent South African passports being used to enter the U.K.”

Among other questions, the test asks passengers to name South Africa’s president, its capital city, and one national public holiday.

Ryanair has not said why it chose Afrikaans, the Dutch colonial language that many associate with white minority rule, for the test.

There are 11 official languages in South Africa, and Afrikaans ranks third for usage below Zulu and IsiXhosa. Only around 13% of South Africans speak Afrikaans as their first language.

“They’re using this in a manner that is utterly absurd,” Conrad Steenkamp, CEO of the Afrikaans Language Council, told reporters. “Afrikaans, you have roughly 20% of the population of South Africa understand Afrikaans. But the rest don’t, so you’re sitting with roughly 50 million people who do not understand Afrikaans.”

“Ryanair should be careful,” he continued. “Language is a sensitive issue. They may well end up in front of the Human Rights Commission with this.”

Ryanair’s policy only applies to South African passengers flying to the United Kingdom from within Europe, since it does not fly out of South Africa.

The British government has said in a statement that it does not require the test.

Anyone who cannot complete the test will be blocked from traveling and given a refund.

Memories of Apartheid Resurface

“The question requiring a person to name a public holiday is particularly on the nose given that SA has a whole public holiday NEXT WEEK commemorating an historic protest that started in response to language-based discrimination,” one person tweeted.

South African citizen Dinesh Joseph told the BBC that he was “seething” with anger when asked to take the test.

“It was the language of apartheid,” he said, adding that it was a trigger for him.

Officials in the country were also surprised by Ryanair’s decision.

We are taken aback by the decision of this airline because the Department regularly communicates with all airlines to update them on how to validate South African passports, including the look and feel,” South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs said in a statement.

Any airline found to have flown a passenger with a fake passport to the U.K. faces a fine of £2,000 from authorities there. Ryanair has also not said whether it requires similar tests for any other nationalities.

Many people expressed outrage at Ryanair’s policy and some told stories of being declined service because they did not pass the test.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (BBC) (Al Jazeera)

Continue Reading